Civilization Wishlist for Civ VII

[Lonecat Nekophrodite]

Depicting Meiji Japan in a game like Humankind, I assume, would be fine as long as you don't depict an actual leader.

I suppose Meiji Japan wasn't in the game is because that would have been the third Japanese culture in a row, and they wanted some differentiation.

Near release promo even cited that there's 'Meiji Japan' with their UU being 'Imperial Guard'. which represents Meiji era military might that capable of beating everyone they fought against.
The cut content did survives as in game model becomes Asian variants of Line Infantry unit.

 

[BuchiTaton]

I just want a non nomadic civ from Central Asia, and by Central Asia I mean the precise modern day notion of "Soviet Central Asia" or "Stans" or "Transoxiana" if you prefer - The area of Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan, Turkmenistan, Kazachstan and East Turkiestan. Like yeah we had some nomadic empires but a) In very different cultural areas and b) Central Asia had a ton of 'real' urban state civilizations.

My absolute favourite would be of course a Timurid civ with Samarkand capital and Timur as a leader, as it would a) Perfectly express this cultural region b) Make modern Uzbeks happy c) Be spectacular as hell d) One more islamic civ in a game with very few and e) Ruin the myth of 'nomadic' central asia and Timurid Empire. You could even do that civilization without Timur as a leader but with scientific Shah Rukh, to deconstruct even more, but I'm afraid Tamerlane is simply too much to ignore.

But there are more options than Timurids. The second best option would be Sogdians who basically founded the entire area. You could also simply make Uzbeks as a civ with Timurid and later early modern civs elements. Uyghurs are also worthy of a separate civilization for themselves.

Generally I think those four would be the most major and simplest civs from this area to implement, although there is a ton of secondary candidates:
- The entire saga of mixed Greeko/Buddhist/ Central Asian civilizations such as Kushans, Indo - Greek Bactria, later variations etc
- Some interesting but 'too archeological' cultures such as Tocharians, Bactria - Mariana etc
- Kazakhs, but they were steppe nomads
- Kyrgyz honestly weren't super spectacular
- I'd love Samanid civ but nobody else would care about it, and the topic of general Tajik entity and language and gow they relate to Persian civilization gave me a headache, though not nearly as bad as the chaos of...
- ...precise distinctions and clear history of Turkic, Gokturk, Turkmen and Turkoman peoples, I am unable to comprehend Turkic peoples history in Central Asia
- Other civilizations such as Kara Khanids...

So, there is plenty to choose from.

For Gurkani (Timurids) Shah Rukh would be better for something more than "Temujin 2.0", and of course the name Gurkani open the chance for others leaders like Babur and Akbar.

My two better options for Central Asia are Hephthalites (Huna*) representing the classical/medieval religious diverse pre-islamic and pre-turkic era, and the Gurkani (Timurid+Mughal) for the medieval/modern turkic+islamic era.

Hephthalites controled both Sogdiana+Bactriana and the Tarim Basin, had a stronger iranian element and cover the time when Buddhism, Zoroastrianism, Manichaeism and Nestorianism still had a strong presence in the region.

 

[TheSpaceCowboy]

The keyword is "Leader" which she wasn't. She never wielded any political power or influence at all, unlike even Gandhi who at least did have influence in India. Same goes for Sacagawea. As @Zaarin said you could always do Molly Brant or Jigonhsasee for the Iroquois if you want a female Native American leader.

I capitalized "Leader" because I was referring strictly to the game mechanic. I don't think that all of Civilization's Leader's need to have been leaders. I'd be fine with making Shakespeare the Leader of England; with Franklin, Hamilton, or Patrick Henry as leader of America; with Martin Luther as leader of Germany; etc.

 

[Zaarin]

For Gurkani (Timurids) Shah Rukh would be better for something more than "Temujin 2.0", and of course the name Gurkani open the chance for others leaders like Babur and Akbar.

My two better options for Central Asia are Hephthalites (Huna*) representing the classical/medieval religious diverse pre-islamic and pre-turkic era, and the Gurkani (Timurid+Mughal) for the medieval/modern turkic+islamic era.

Hephthalites controled both Sogdiana+Bactriana and the Tarim Basin, had a stronger iranian element and cover the time when Buddhism, Zoroastrianism, Manichaeism and Nestorianism still had a strong presence in the region.

I wish we could have a civ that followed the Church of the East. The problem with that being, of course, that there were no civs that followed the Church of the East; it was a minority wherever it went. The closest we could get would be having Sorghaghtani Beki lead Mongolia. Which would be super interesting, but I doubt it would ever happen. The Lakhmids also had some leaders who followed the Church of the East, but they kind of lose out against more interesting Classical Arabic/Aramaic kingdoms like the Ghassanids (Miaphysite, later Melkite), Nabataeans (pagan, later Melkite), or Palmyrenes (pagan).

 

[Krajzen]

I wish we could have a civ that followed the Church of the East. The problem with that being, of course, that there were no civs that followed the Church of the East; it was a minority wherever it went. The closest we could get would be having Sorghaghtani Beki lead Mongolia. Which would be super interesting, but I doubt it would ever happen. The Lakhmids also had some leaders who followed the Church of the East, but they kind of lose out against more interesting Classical Arabic/Aramaic kingdoms like the Ghassanids (Miaphysite, later Melkite), Nabataeans (pagan, later Melkite), or Palmyrenes (pagan).

Yeah this is the same problem for Maniche - wait a minute, couldn't Uyghur civ actually also be like the only legit base religiom Manicheism civ in the game?

By the way there is one thing I wanted to discuss directly for once, instead of allusions and sentiments.

Would it be possible for civ games to have Tibetan, Uyghur, Manchu etc civs in the game without Xi "Winnie" Jingping going crazy, or not?
I mean, you could say yes if they were focused on ancient entities far from 20th century. But Xi's censorship is going so far over recent years that on one occasion they tried to ban name "Genghis Khan" in some particular context iirc I also vaguely re all they banned a certain letter from search engines for a few days because it was used by opposition. So it's quite unpredictable. Especially good luck with Uyghur civ minefield, which for some reason is precisely the kind of civ I'd love to see in the game right now.

 

[FishFishFish]

Would it be possible for civ games to have Tibetan, Uyghur, Manchu etc civs in the game without Xi "Winnie" Jingping going crazy, or not?

I don't think a Tibetan or Uyghur civ is ever going to make it into the game but a Qing (or Jin) Manchu leader in charge of China is possible.

 

[Zaarin]

Yeah this is the same problem for Maniche - wait a minute, couldn't Uyghur civ actually also be like the only legit base religiom Manicheism civ in the game?

Yes, I believe so. Man, now I want a Uyghur Khaganate civ.

Would it be possible for civ games to have Tibetan, Uyghur, Manchu etc civs in the game without Xi "Winnie" Jingping going crazy, or not?

I don't think a Tibetan or Uyghur civ is ever going to make it into the game but a Qing (or Jin) Manchu leader in charge of China is possible.

I personally think a Tibetan civ based on the Tibetan Empire would be pretty safe. Under the current political circumstances, however, I highly doubt that the PRC would tolerate a Uyghur civ. (I agree that the only way we're likely to see a Manchu leader in game is as a Qing emperor of China.)

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

I capitalized "Leader" because I was referring strictly to the game mechanic. I don't think that all of Civilization's Leader's need to have been leaders. I'd be fine with making Shakespeare the Leader of England; with Franklin, Hamilton, or Patrick Henry as leader of America; with Martin Luther as leader of Germany; etc.

I believe there can be a few exceptions. But why not just have Elizabeth lead a cultural England, while leaving Shakespeare as a Great Writer?

I personally think a Tibetan civ based on the Tibetan Empire would be pretty safe. Under the current political circumstances, however, I highly doubt that the PRC would tolerate a Uyghur civ. (I agree that the only way we're likely to see a Manchu leader in game is as a Qing emperor of China.)

I feel like a Kievan Rus civ, or a Russian based Kiev civ, is in the same boat now.

 

[Zaarin]

I feel like a Kievan Rus civ, or a Russian based Kiev civ, is in the same boat now.

I mean, a Kiev-based Russia would certainly help propitiate the Russian government; the current American regime less so--but they're probably not going to outright censor it yet. Baʿl, I hate politics. I understand that businesses have to be conscious of geopolitics because they want to sell games, but as a historian I just want to say, "Screw the nationalists. Screw the communists. Just respect history."

 

[Taizong4Civ7]

I just want to say that while we're sorta on the topic of Chinese leaders, Chiang Kai-Shek is disliked on both sides of the strait. At the same time, traditional Chinese historiography is unfriendly to leaders who lost their hold on power, and having the RoC reduced to a rump state on Taiwan doesn't make him look all that good from that angle either. However you put it, he's a pretty dismal leader choice, current politics notwithstanding.

In fact, how about choosing a popular, iconic choice across the board like Tang Taizong -- the "model" Confucian Son of Heaven, who wasn't an unreasonable megalomaniac (like 2/3 of the Chinese leaders we keep getting)?

 

[Zaarin]

In fact, how about choosing a popular, iconic choice across the board like Tang Taizong -- the "model" Confucian Son of Heaven, who wasn't an unreasonable megalomaniac (like 2/3 of the Chinese leaders we keep getting)?

I'm perpetually disappointed that the Chinese version of Civ4 got Taizong of Tang, who has yet to appear in mainstream Civ.

 

[Taizong4Civ7]

I'm perpetually disappointed that the Chinese version of Civ4 got Taizong of Tang, who has yet to appear in mainstream Civ.

True, true. I feel like the devs were going for name recognition (from a western audience, hence the Stalin and Chairman Mao and Gandhi and whatnot) in the previous games, but it's a more enlightened era now with a wider audience and I think the leader choices should reflect this.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

I mean, a Kiev-based Russia would certainly help propitiate the Russian government; the current American regime less so--but they're probably not going to outright censor it yet. Baʿl, I hate politics. I understand that businesses have to be conscious of geopolitics because they want to sell games, but as a historian I just want to say, "Screw the nationalists. Screw the communists. Just respect history."

Yeah I didn't mean Russia would censor it. I could see Ukrainians having a problem with it.

I just want to say that while we're sorta on the topic of Chinese leaders, Chiang Kai-Shek is disliked on both sides of the strait. At the same time, traditional Chinese historiography is unfriendly to leaders who lost their hold on power, and having the RoC reduced to a rump state on Taiwan doesn't make him look all that good from that angle either. However you put it, he's a pretty dismal leader choice, current politics notwithstanding.

Imperial China from the Classical Era to Early Modern Era is so much more interesting time periods anyway. Plenty of leaders to choose from without having to pick from the 20th century.

 

[Zaarin]

True, true. I feel like the devs were going for name recognition (from a western audience, hence the Stalin and Chairman Mao and Gandhi and whatnot) in the previous games, but it's a more enlightened era now with a wider audience and I think the leader choices should reflect this.

Yes, Civ1-4 were very much pop culture takes on history, though I think Civ4 was about when they made the first steps towards taking history more seriously. It's unfortunate the Gandhi meme has survived that, but overall they're making better choices. I had no problem with Wu Zetian or Qin Shi Huang, but I do think Taizong's appearance is overdue. Lots of interesting choices for China; too many to look to contentious 20th century leaders or to repeat some of the more boring choices like Qin Shi Huang (I wouldn't mind seeing Wu Zetian again at some point, though).

The other area I'd like to see improved is the choice of Russian leaders: Catherine the Great was a Lutheran German princess who had a great deal of contempt for Russia, despite being a very effective leader thereof, and Peter the Great's antipathy towards Orthodoxy puts him at odds with the general tenor of Russian history. I'd like to see a more Eastern-oriented Russian leader in Civ7: a grand prince of Kiev or Muscovy or a prince of Novgorod ideally. For an Enlightenment ruler of Russia, at the very least I'd prefer Yelisaveta to Peter or Catherine.

 

[Saxo Grammaticus]

On a side note, if you ever thought the odds were not sufficiently stacked in Russia's favor, JFD's Elizabeth is an absolutely blast to play as, due to tying envoys to all those great people, and most importantly including a unique building to absorb--ahem, store--all their great works. I am a little surprised we have not gotten Aleksandr Nevsky yet.

 

[Zaarin]

I am a little surprised we have not gotten Aleksandr Nevsky yet.

Aleksandr Nevsky and Ivan III are my top choices for Russia in Civ7 personally.

 

[BuchiTaton]

Aleksandr Nevsky and Ivan III are my top choices for Russia in Civ7 personally.

Another advantage about Ivan III is that his realm was mostly inside current russian frontiers so the list of cities would not included many cities that would be of bad taste to include for Russia right now.

 

[Boris Gudenuf]

Another advantage about Ivan III is that his realm was mostly inside current russian frontiers so the list of cities would not included many cities that would be of bad taste to include for Russia right now.

Just about any Russian leader before Peter would be largely involved with 'native Russian' territory - Peter was the first one to engage the Ukrainian partisans in any meaningful way, and even Ivan IV only went as far south as Kazan along the Volga: Russian advances into the modern Donbass and the lower Don didn't occur until the late 18th century.

Ivan III or Ivan IV remain my top choices for a 'new' Russian leader in Civ VII: it's long past time that they quit going back to the same Bolshoi Petr and Ekaterina and brought in a 'Russian' leader who was something other than Pseudo-Western or German . . .

 

[TahamiTsunami]

Yeah, it sounding like it's about time to try some other leaders for China and Russia. If America can finally be in a game without Lincoln or Washington, we can be optimistic for new choices for Russia and China in Civ 7 (not that I'd mind seeing Wu Zetian again but a Taizong or Han Wudi would be a welcome change for me).

I'd also like to add, if you really wanted to have a woman leading the Powhatan as mentioned on the previous page, I'd confidently say that Cockacoeske would be a better choice than Pocahontas. I'd still greatly prefer her uncle Powhatan but Cockacoeske is one of those leaders who had some successes and made the best out of the bad hand she was dealt.

 

[Henri Christophe]

5. Haiti (replaces Canada)

I want to see that in this game. Haiti as a principal fracofone of Americas